• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

社区响应式研究重点:卫生研究基础设施

Community-responsive research priorities: health research infrastructure.

作者信息

Jones Bonnie, Lightfoot Alexandra, De Marco Molly, Isler Malika Roman, Ammerman Alice, Nelson Debi, Harrison Lisa, Motsinger Brenda, Melvin Cathy, Corbie-Smith Giselle

机构信息

North Carolina Translational and Clinical Sciences Institute, USA.

出版信息

Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2012 Fall;6(3):339-48. doi: 10.1353/cpr.2012.0045.

DOI:10.1353/cpr.2012.0045
PMID:22982847
Abstract

THE PROBLEM

A disconnect exists between research resources and the health and health care needs of people those resources are designed to serve. While a great deal of research is being produced at academic institutions across the country, the topics investigated are often driven by researchers' interests or by funding announcements focused on specific research areas of interest to the funder. PURPOSE OF THE ARTICLE: The purpose of this article is to describe a process that connects community identified health priorities with research funds as well as capacity building efforts.

KEY POINTS

The North Carolina Translational and Clinical Sciences Institute (NC TraCS) developed a process to identify the health priorities of North Carolina communities through a partnership with the network of county Healthy Carolinians partnerships. The priorities identified were obesity, youth issues, healthcare delivery/access, mental health/ substance abuse, specific chronic diseases, cancer/tobacco, and injury/ violence. NC TraCS then used these research priorities to guide pilot funding and facilitate research capacity building.

CONCLUSIONS

Tapping into an established community-based network and linking researchers to community-identified priorities ensures that NC TraCS addresses the most pressing health needs of North Carolina's residents.

摘要

问题

研究资源与这些资源旨在服务的人群的健康及医疗保健需求之间存在脱节。尽管全国各地的学术机构正在开展大量研究,但所调查的主题往往由研究人员的兴趣或资助公告驱动,这些公告聚焦于资助者感兴趣的特定研究领域。本文目的:本文旨在描述一个将社区确定的健康优先事项与研究资金以及能力建设努力联系起来的过程。

关键点

北卡罗来纳州转化与临床科学研究所(NC TraCS)通过与各县“健康卡罗来纳人”伙伴关系网络合作,制定了一个确定北卡罗来纳州社区健康优先事项的过程。确定的优先事项包括肥胖、青少年问题、医疗服务提供/可及性、心理健康/药物滥用、特定慢性病、癌症/烟草以及伤害/暴力。NC TraCS随后利用这些研究优先事项来指导试点资金并促进研究能力建设。

结论

利用已建立的基于社区的网络并将研究人员与社区确定的优先事项联系起来,确保了NC TraCS满足北卡罗来纳州居民最紧迫的健康需求。

相似文献

1
Community-responsive research priorities: health research infrastructure.社区响应式研究重点:卫生研究基础设施
Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2012 Fall;6(3):339-48. doi: 10.1353/cpr.2012.0045.
2
A community translational research pilot grants program to facilitate community--academic partnerships: lessons from Colorado's clinical translational science awards.一项促进社区与学术机构合作的社区转化研究试点资助计划:来自科罗拉多州临床转化科学奖的经验教训。
Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2012 Fall;6(3):381-7. doi: 10.1353/cpr.2012.0036.
3
Participatory evaluation of a community-academic partnership to inform capacity-building and sustainability.社区-学术伙伴关系的参与式评估,以指导能力建设和可持续性发展。
Eval Program Plann. 2015 Oct;52:19-26. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2015.03.005. Epub 2015 Mar 31.
4
Health Extension and Clinical and Translational Science: An Innovative Strategy for Community Engagement.健康推广与临床及转化科学:一种社区参与的创新策略。
J Am Board Fam Med. 2017 Jan 2;30(1):94-99. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2017.01.160119.
5
A Model for Strengthening Collaborative Research Capacity: Illustrations From the Atlanta Clinical Translational Science Institute.加强协作研究能力的模型:来自亚特兰大临床与转化科学研究所的实例
Health Educ Behav. 2014 Jun;41(3):267-74. doi: 10.1177/1090198113511815. Epub 2013 Dec 5.
6
Incorporating Community Engagement in Primary Care Research Training: Eleven-Year Outcomes.将社区参与纳入初级保健研究培训:十一年的结果。
Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2020;14(1):63-74. doi: 10.1353/cpr.2020.0009.
7
Energizing community health improvement: the promise of microgrants.为社区健康改善注入活力:小额赠款的前景。
Prev Chronic Dis. 2005 Nov;2 Spec no(Spec No):A16. Epub 2005 Nov 1.
8
The citizen scientist: Community-academic partnerships through Translational Advisory Boards.公民科学家:通过转化咨询委员会建立社区与学术机构的伙伴关系。
Patient Educ Couns. 2016 Dec;99(12):2087-2090. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.07.013. Epub 2016 Jul 5.
9
Rural Oregon community perspectives: introducing community-based participatory research into a community health coalition.俄勒冈州农村社区的观点:将基于社区的参与性研究引入社区健康联盟。
Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2013 Fall;7(3):313-22. doi: 10.1353/cpr.2013.0032.
10
Creating a locally driven research agenda for the ethnic minorities of Eastern Myanmar.为缅甸东部的少数民族制定一个本土化的研究议程。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Jun 26;17(1):64. doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0465-7.

引用本文的文献

1
The RxHL study: community-responsive research to explore barriers to medication adherence.RxHL 研究:以社区为响应的研究,探索药物依从性障碍。
Health Educ Res. 2019 Dec 1;34(6):556-568. doi: 10.1093/her/cyz029.
2
Needs assessment and research priorities in the oral and dental health with health promotion approach in Iran.伊朗口腔和牙齿健康领域基于健康促进方法的需求评估与研究重点
J Educ Health Promot. 2019 May 14;8:93. doi: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_288_18. eCollection 2019.
3
Strategies used and lessons learned by community assistants in organising regional forums for cancer education in Iowa, USA.
美国爱荷华州社区助理在组织癌症教育区域论坛时所采用的策略及经验教训。
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2018 Sep;27(5):e12868. doi: 10.1111/ecc.12868. Epub 2018 Jun 6.
4
Five Dimensions of Research Ethics: A Stakeholder Framework for Creating a Climate of Research Integrity.研究伦理的五个维度:营造研究诚信氛围的利益相关者框架
Acad Med. 2018 Apr;93(4):550-555. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001966.
5
A Retrospective on the Vision for : .对……愿景的回顾 : 。 你提供的原文“A Retrospective on the Vision for :.”似乎不太完整,冒号后面缺少具体内容,请补充完整以便能更准确地翻译。
Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2017;11(1):1-11. doi: 10.1353/cpr.2017.0001.
6
Bridging Research, Practice, and Policy: The "Evidence Academy" Conference Model.架起研究、实践与政策之间的桥梁:“循证研究院”会议模式
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2016 Mar-Apr;22(2):200-3. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000230.